11.07.2015 Views

An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century - California Ocean ...

An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century - California Ocean ...

An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century - California Ocean ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Box 9.4 Balancing Federal <strong>Ocean</strong> Activities with State Coastal ManagementPrograms: The Federal Consistency ToolIn <strong>the</strong> area of natural resource management, one of <strong>the</strong> more interesting, innovative, andsometimes contentious features of <strong>the</strong> nation’s system of federalism is <strong>the</strong> relationshipbetween <strong>the</strong> federal government and coastal state governments with respect to <strong>the</strong> controland shaping of ocean activities in federal waters.Historically, this relationship has taken on many hues and <strong>for</strong>ms, but its policy and legalaspects have been largely structured over <strong>the</strong> last three decades by <strong>the</strong> development of onesection of a single law, <strong>the</strong> so-called federal consistency provision (Section 307 of <strong>the</strong> CoastalZone Management Act). As noted earlier in this chapter, <strong>the</strong> promise of federal consistencywas one of two incentives (<strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r being grant money) Congress provided to encouragestate participation in this voluntary program.In very general terms, it is a promise that federal government actions that are reasonablylikely to affect <strong>the</strong> coastal resources of a state with an approved coastal management programwill be consistent with <strong>the</strong> en<strong>for</strong>ceable policies of that program. Under some circumstances,it is a limited waiver of federal authority in an area—offshore waters seaward ofstate submerged lands—in which <strong>the</strong> federal government o<strong>the</strong>rwise exercises full jurisdictionover <strong>the</strong> management of living and nonliving resources.The underlying principle of federal consistency represents a key feature of cooperativefederalism: <strong>the</strong> need <strong>for</strong> federal agencies to adequately consider state coastal managementprograms by fostering early consultation, cooperation, and coordination be<strong>for</strong>e taking anaction that is likely to affect <strong>the</strong> land or water use or natural resources of such state’s coastalzone. It facilitates significant input at <strong>the</strong> state and local level from those who are closest to<strong>the</strong> issue and in a position to know <strong>the</strong> most about <strong>the</strong>ir coastal resources.The process, however, is not one-sided. For states to exercise federal consistency authority,<strong>the</strong>y must submit and receive approval of <strong>the</strong>ir coastal management programs from <strong>the</strong>Secretary of Commerce. Congress established <strong>the</strong> general criteria <strong>for</strong> approval of <strong>the</strong> programs,including a review by o<strong>the</strong>r federal agencies be<strong>for</strong>e <strong>the</strong> plans are officially authorized.A core criterion <strong>for</strong> program approval is whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> management program adequately considers<strong>the</strong> national interest when planning <strong>for</strong> and managing <strong>the</strong> coastal zone, including <strong>the</strong>siting of facilities (such as energy facilities) that are of greater than local significance.Once a state has received approval, federal consistency procedures are triggered. Undercurrent practice, states only review federal actions that have reasonably <strong>for</strong>eseeable coastaleffects. There is flexibility in <strong>the</strong> law to allow agreements between states and federal agenciesthat can streamline many aspects of program implementation. For example, <strong>the</strong>re maybe understandings with respect to classes of activities that do not have coastal effects.O<strong>the</strong>rwise, <strong>the</strong> decisions about such effects are made on a case-by-case basis.There have been disagreements between federal agencies and states on some coastalissues, <strong>the</strong> more high profile ones largely in <strong>the</strong> area of offshore oil and gas development.(For a fur<strong>the</strong>r discussion of this issue, see Chapter 24.) Never<strong>the</strong>less, in general, <strong>the</strong> federalconsistency coordination process has improved federal-state relationships in ocean management.States and local governments have to consider national interests while making <strong>the</strong>ircoastal management decisions and federal agencies are directed to adjust <strong>the</strong>ir decisionmaking to address <strong>the</strong> en<strong>for</strong>ceable policies of a state’s coastal management program.In <strong>the</strong> event of a disagreement between <strong>the</strong> state and a federal agency, <strong>the</strong> agencymay proceed with its activity over <strong>the</strong> state’s objection, but it must show that it is meeting acertain level of consistency. In a separate part of <strong>the</strong> federal consistency section, <strong>the</strong> coastalactivities of third party applicants <strong>for</strong> federal licenses or permits are required to be consistentwith <strong>the</strong> state’s program. If <strong>the</strong> state does not certify that <strong>the</strong> activities will be consistent,<strong>the</strong> federal agency shall not grant <strong>the</strong> license or permit and <strong>the</strong> proposed action may not go158 A N O CEAN B LUEPRINT FOR THE 21ST C ENTURY

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!